A C TA U N I V E R S I TAT I S L O D Z I E N S I S
FOLIA SOCIOLOGICA 44, 2013
Bernadett Csurgó*, Imre Kovách**
NETWORKING LEADER AND LOCAL OLIGARCHIES
Abstract: This paper presents a case study from Hungary about the “Nagykunságért” LEADER Local Action Group, which demonstrates the limits of an actor’s involvement in local rural
development. Project participation in this region depends on the financial and managerial capacity
of participants. Actors with capacity are involved with the project as a matter of course, but those
without capacity are crowded out and lack access to resources. Actors in rural development are
characterised by their ability to disseminate diverse kinds of information and use of knowledge. Inclusion, exclusion, and the power of local oligarchies are main concepts in this paper, which studies
LEADER as a tool which may be used either for democracy or against local democratic control over
the distribution of development funds.
Keywords: involvement, oligarchy, knowledge, project class.
1. Introduction: The LEADER questions in Hungary
M . S h u c k s m i t h (2000), as well as S. S h o r t a l (2004), note that exclusion and inclusion can be regarded as major characteristics of LEADER.
According to studies of local power networks, the actors who have access to
rural-development programmes are those with knowledge, capital and networking capacity (C s u r g ó, K o v á c h, K u č e r o v á 2008; C s u r g ó et. al., 2010).
S h u c k s m i t h (2000) argues that the issues of inclusion and exclusion surrounding development projects, which is a broader concept than poverty, are the new
dimensions of social inequality. The rise of a project class (K o v á c h, K u c e r o v a 2006, 2009) and the project activities of civil associations have restructured
local power relations. M.-C. M a u r e l (2009) argues that interest groups limit the LEADER bottom-up principles and the democratic control over the use
* PhD, Research Fellow, Institute of Sociology, Centre for Social Sciences, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 1014 Budapest, Országház u. 30. 1250 Budapest, Pf. 20 Hungary; [email protected].
** Professor, Institute of Sociology, Centre for Social Sciences, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 1014 Budapest, Országház u. 30. 1250 Budapest, Pf. 20 Hungary; [email protected].
[73]
74
Bernadett Csurgó, Imre Kovách
of development sources; therefore, the social and power impacts of LEADER remain little understood. I. K o v á c h (2000) writes that over-bureaucratisation is
the main challenge to implementing LEADER in new member states.
The EU LEADER programme started 10–12 years ago in Hungary, and implementation is still in a transitory phase, arising from many unresolved questions. During 2001–2004, there was a tentative LEADER; in 2004–2006 there
was LEADER+; currently, a LEADER 4 programme is being managed. Following a preparatory period for EU membership, LEADER-type micro-regional programmes and training sessions were launched for micro-regional development
policy actors. The SAPARD programme (Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development) involved local actors in cooperating and planning
for 144 rural-development programmes, and 4,300 project plans for all micro-regions (Csite 2005; Nemes 2005). In 2001, a LEADER pilot programme, focused on
learning how to plan, was opened to 12 micro-regions (Fazekas, Nemes 2005). In
2005, the AVOP LEADER+ began. A training period for local actors was an initial
part of this programme, followed by an application for LEADER grants in 2006.
Seventy LAGs were able to contract 1.5 million people living in 920 villages and
small towns in successful Local Action Group LEADER regions.
In 2007, the second phase of LEADER started as part of the New Hunga­
rian Rural Development Programme. The deadline for submission for the resources of the Third Pillar of the Rural Development Plan was in 2008 October.
Decision-making was delayed by 10–11 months and the actors involved evaluated the procedure as the over-bureaucratisation of the bottom-up LEADER
programmes (H i g h, N e m e s 2007). Capacity building (K i s s, S z e k e r e s n é
2010) and civil-association involvement were the most positive outcomes.
In this paper, we present the activities of the Nagykunságért Local Action Group. This case study is part of a LAG international research programme
supported by the Finnish Ministry of Agriculture, and which was organised by
the Swedish School of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki, and the Institute
for Sociology, Centre for Social Sciences, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
We conducted 16 interviews in 2010 and 2011 with LAG members and representatives of LEADER projects and local stakeholders (two interviews with LAG
organisation staff, 13 with LAG members, including local government leaders, civic organisations and entrepreneurs, and one with an independent project leader).
The outcome of the case study refers to social inclusion (S h u c k s m i t h
2000), and looks at LEADER as not only a development programme which gene­
rates local networks and community-related social capital, but one which promotes social inclusion or exclusion. The Nagykunságért Local Action Group story
is about a form of local development which is generated by active local networks,
and which contributes to local community building.
The Nagykunságért LAG region is situated in the eastern part of Hungary, in
Jász-Nagykun Szolnok County. The topography of Jász-Nagykun Szolnok County
Networking LEADER and Local Oligarchies
75
is characterized by the Great Plain. The LAG area consists of eight settlements:
five towns and three villages. The LAG area covers the main part of the historical and geographical Nagykunság (Greater Cumania) region; the name itself of
the LAG refers to this historical–territorial heritage. Nagykunság is one of the historical European regions encompassed by Cumania, named after the Cumans,
a nomadic tribe of pagan Kipchaks that settled in the area.
The LAG region covers the whole of the Mezőtúr micro-region (Mezőtúr,
Túrkeve, Kétpó, Mezőhék, Mesterszállás) and three settlements (Kisújszállás,
Kenderes, Karcag) from the Karcag micro-region, including the central settlement. It is located in the south-eastern part of Jász-Nagykun Szolnok County.
The most important sector of the economy is agriculture, which can be considered
quite stable and productive. The population of the region is decreasing. The high
quality of arable land, hot springs, and the large amount of sunshine hours can be
mentioned as the most important natural values of the county. The flora and fauna
are also rich; for this reason, there is a great deal of protected land in the region.
Figure 1. Location of the Nagykunságért LEADER region
S o u r c e: C s u r g ó, K o v á c h 2000: 5; Z. L á s z l ó, Magyarország közigazgatási atlasza,
“Geodézia és Kartográfia”, vol. 4, pp. 46–47; http://lazarus.elte.hu/hun/hunkarta/varme/jas/jasz.gif,
28.10.2013.
76
Bernadett Csurgó, Imre Kovách
The current LAG originates from the first period (2004–2006) of LEADER in
Hungary. For the second period (2007–2013), the previous LAG organisation was
able to organise a new LAG with the participation of most of the previous members. The first LEADER region consisted of ten settlements from the Nagykunság
region, while the current one consists of eight settlements from the previously
participating ten. The centre of the current LAG is in Túrkeve, the central town
of the previous LEADER, which demonstrates the continuity of the two LEADER
periods. All respondents emphasised the different organisational forms of the two
LEADER periods. In the first period, the central local organisation of LEADER
was a sub-department of local government.
The Development Strategy Program of the Nagykunságért LAG was created
by the LAG during several forums of social consultation. The Program is valid
for the recent LEADER period from 2007–2013. LAG aimed to gather together the most important interests and demands of the region. However, LEADER
can generally only support goals and activities which are not supported by other development funds. The general rules and framework of LEADER determines
the strategy of local development.
The main purposes of the Development Strategy are connected to rural life
and tourism and to the development of non-agricultural SMEs. The main goals
and priorities of the Strategy Programs determining the project activities are:
1) inspiration of rural tourism; 2) development of local SMEs; 3) development of
organic and renewable energy activities in the region; 4) development of villages;
5) development and supply of local goods and services; 6) development of human
resources; 7) development of local networks, community building; 8) protection
and development of local heritage; and 9) improvement of public security in each
settlement.
In the first, pilot, period, there were only 100 million HUF (€ 375,000) for
supporting local projects along with the administrative costs of the LEADER organisation.
In the case of the recent LEADER, an independent organisation has been established. The legal form of the LEADER in the region is a non-profit enterprise.
The amount of support became much higher; the LAG can access more money for
supporting local projects. They have chosen the form of a non-profit enterprise
because in this form the affiliation of members is easy, while in the case of an
association (as the other optional form for LAGs in Hungary), it is more rigid.
An important difference between the first and the current LEADER period
is the method of decision-making. In the first period, a local rural-development
expert group and the LAG staff took decisions without any formal control. In this
period, the LAG only made pre-decisions, and the final decisions were made by
MVH (Agricultural and Rural Development Agency) as a control organisation
over the whole LEADER system in Hungary. MVH is supervised by the Minister
Networking LEADER and Local Oligarchies
77
of Agriculture and Rural Development. The Agency consists of a central organisation operating on horizontal lines, with directorates holding official power, as
well as county offices with 19 representatives. MVH, as an institution, was founded to manage applications for support financed from EU agricultural and rural
development resources and support provided by the Hungarian national budget,
as well as for the allocation of support and the implementation of measures for
the regulation of the market.
The independence of the LAG organisation from local government has resulted many problems. LEADER projects are post-financed, so the LEADER organisation needs credit to finance the cost of personnel. Nevertheless, support is
not been able to cover the extra cost of credit. During the first period, the local
government was able to manage the problems of post-financing.
2. Social inclusion and social exclusion: rural-development actors
The Nagykunságért LAG is divided into two main parts: the Personnel and
the Board. The principal LAG actor is the LAG staff, including the president of
LAG, two project managers, and two project assistants. The president of LAG is
a local expert who led the LAG staff during the first period. In the first period,
the president of LAG was the current local mayor of Túrkeve. The principal LAG
actors are the current and the ex-president. The importance of LEADER is very
high in Túrkeve local policy.
There are 39 members in the LAG with their own business shares. The share
capital is 1,950,000 HUF (€ 7,000); six local governments are members of
the LAG. The national rule is that only 30% of LAG members can be comprised
of local governments, but in this case only 15% of LAG members include local
government. Most of the members are comprised of civic organisations. Most
of the actors are private actors, like local civic organisations and SMEs. Several respondents emphasised that there were no individual actors in the LAG; all
the members have institutional backgrounds.
The LAG Board has 13 members: 39 LAG members are divided into 13 subgroups, each subgroup consisting of three LAG members. Each subgroup has
a delegate who sits on the Board. Participation of members in the subgroups depends on the type of actors involved. For example, local governments of small
villages create one subgroup, and there are subgroups of different types of local
enterprise and civic organisations (for example, cultural civic organisations in
Kisújszállás have also created one).
The Board is organised by the subgroups’ delegates. Delegates represent
the subgroup members and their interests and demands. The main function of
the Board is decision-making. Their decisions are only pre-decisions. They decide
78
Bernadett Csurgó, Imre Kovách
on the sequence of supported projects in order of quality, but the MVH, as the national control organisation, has the final decision on rural development.
The most active applicants of the local LEADER come from Mezőtúr, which
is one of the biggest towns in the LEADER region. The local government of
Mezőtúr is a member of the LAG. The least active settlement, Karcag, is also one
of the biggest. The local government of Karcag does not participate in the LAG.
Local respondents emphasised that Karcag wanted to create its own LAG, and
when it was frustrated in this attempt the settlement joined the Nagykunságért
LAG. However, the local actors from Karcag are mostly unmotivated.
There is a local development-planning group, which includes the participation of local experts and some LAG members. They help the LAG in the planning
process. The planning group consists of 21 members. The local development plan
is based on the project collection organised by the LAG personnel and on the suggestions of the planning group.
The relationship between members of the LAG is characterised by horizontal
cooperation. The LAG personnel have the most influence, because of their know­
ledge. Most of the issues of LEADER are organised by the LAG personnel. LAG
members, and also the Board members, only negotiate the issues and tasks prepared
by LAG personnel. Board members do not have a higher power position than other members. LAG members do not have a higher status in the application process
than other local actors. Several respondents emphasised that they were planning to
step down from the LAG, because this position did not give them any advantages.
3. Inclusion through networks and knowledge
The Nagykunságért LAG uses several forms of actor involvement. The LAG
personnel organise Consultation Days to inform the local citizens about application methods and rules. Another important form of participation is the survey on
project ideas. LAG personnel organise Information Forums on LEADER in each
settlement of the LEADER region. They present the development possibilities and
introduce the work of the personnel. Local citizens are able to ask and collect
information on LEADER.
The Nagykunságért LAG had supported only 33 projects by the end of 2010.
They aim to support financially bigger projects, not wanting to fritter away their
support. The total amount of support was about 342 million HUF (€ 1,222,000).
Because of this, the involvement of local society as a supported project owner is
very weak.
An important form of participation is the LEADER EXPO, organised in the region every year. It is an important opportunity for knowledge transfer between
local citizens and local and non-local experts. It consists of several professional
events, and one congress with the participation of non-local experts and politicians.
Networking LEADER and Local Oligarchies
79
There are 39 members of the Nagykunságért LAG. The forms of participation
in the LAG’s work depend on the role and position of the members. Every year,
there is an annual meeting for the members, during which the personnel present
the work and outcomes of LAG and members can give feedback on the work of
the LAG personnel and Board.
Participation in rural-development projects requires knowledge-intensive actors. Processes of rural development projects are characterised by strong
use of knowledge. Many types of local knowledge were used in the case of
the Nagykunságért LAG, relating to the level of involvement of local actors. At
the same time, lack of local knowledge causes problems and failure (C s u r g ó,
K o v á c h, K u č e r o v á 2008; K e l e m e n, B o l d i z s á r, N a g y 2008).
The main form of knowledge used by the LAG personnel uses is managerial
knowledge. The staff members have knowledge on the rules and regulations of
LEADER and its overall development.
The members of the LAG mostly use their lay knowledge concerning the work
of the LAG. Project applicants use both their lay and scientific knowledge during
their individual LEADER projects. Because of the lack of managerial knowledge,
most applicants need help and assistance. There are some local project managers
who have knowledge of the LEADER system, and mostly they write and manage
the local LEADER projects.
There is a local expert group involved in the planning process of local strategy.
They use their scientific knowledge during the planning process. The case of the Development of civic society in Kisújszállás project illustrates the project’s interests
in knowledge and the network-intensive actors in the region. Kisújszállás is one
of the biggest settlements in the LAG area. The Association for the Protection and
Development of the Town, as project leader, aimed to develop a computer system
for the Association’s headquarters. The project was started in 2008 and finished in
2009. The main target of this infrastructure development was the development of
communication possibilities of civic organisations in the town. The headquarters
of the Association functions as a center of civic organisation of the town.
The project originated from the demands of the local civic society. Civic organisations in Kisújszállás clustered around the headquarters of the Association.
They demanded communication infrastructure for their activities. Infrastructure
development was presented as a community-building tool in the framework of
the LEADER application. Several actors of the LAG area applied for community
building projects. It was a real competitive process between locals. Most civic organizations and local governments aimed for such projects. The number of
stakeholders and the social impact of the project goals were the criteria the LAG
used for the selection of community-building projects.
The Association’s projects involved the civic organizations of Kisújszállás
as a target group, and several civic enterprises participated in the implementation of
the process, providing their services. The involvement of local actors is managed by
80
Bernadett Csurgó, Imre Kovách
the Association. The Association has collected the demands of civic organizations
in the town, and selected the entrepreneurs for infrastructural development works.
The most important actor of the project is the Association, as project applicant
and leader.
Ninety-five percent of the project is financed by LEADER funds; and 5% is
financed by other sources, such as donations from local citizens. As the leader
of the project emphasized, without LEADER funds they are not able to finance
the project.
The project followed the administrative commitment of LEADER. It was
supervised by a double supervisory system, which included LAG personnel and
MVH. The leader of the Association said they got help from the LAG personnel,
and that owing to this help bureaucratic tasks seemed easier, and not so much time
had to be spent on dealing with bureaucratic requirements. They had contact only
with the LAG personnel, and they did not require direct contact with MVH.
The project is led by the Association. The staff of the Association has pro­
ject application and management knowledge. The staff of the Association made
decisions on project activities and chose the project participants. They collected
the demands of local civic society, which appeared in the project goals. Local
opinions and interests are mostly integrated informally, through local networks of
the Association.
The achievement of the project was measured within the general framework of
the LEADER project process. There are general indicators for community-building
projects, including the number of stakeholders, number of participants, etc. The general measurement uses quantitative indicators. There is an evaluation process inside the LEADER framework, which is led by LAG personnel. They evaluated all
the projects of the LAG region. They used general indicators for their evaluation.
The main aim of the project is the infrastructural development of the IT system of the Association, which has an impact on its capacity building. The central
position of the Association means that its development contributes to civic society
throughout the town.
This case also demonstrates that the most important form of knowledge used in
the LAG is managerial knowledge. The central role of managerial knowledge resulted in networking with other LAGs, and development actors becoming unimportant
and invisible; the most important partner is the MVH. The importance of the local
network appears inside the LEADER region and mostly inside individual projects.
4. Inclusion through capacity
The Nagykunságért LAG uses several forms of participation, but most local actors are not involved in the LAG. They support bigger projects. The most successful
applicants are entrepreneurs from Mezőtúr. The case of the Nagykunságért LAG
Networking LEADER and Local Oligarchies
81
is used to refer to the approach to social exclusion and its connection with use of
knowledge and the capacity of actors.
We can find a territorial mechanism of inclusion in the Nagykunságért LAG.
Most of the LAG members are located in Mezőtúr and Túrkeve. Fewer parti­
cipants are in Karcag. The kinds of territorial differences are based on political
mechanisms. Karcag is the biggest town in the LEADER region, but local government interest is not connected to the LEADER, and there is no other actor which
could motivate locals in Karcag to apply for LEADER funds.
The Túrkeve local government has a political interest in maintaining
the LEADER. The local political success of the mayor is based on the organisation
of previous LEADERs and LAGs, and local government has strong connections to
the Nagykunságért LAG.
Actors in Mezőtúr have both an economical and social interest in maintaining
the LAG. Local enterprises are very active in applying for European development
funds, and to them, LEADER constitutes an important opportunity for development. The local government of Mezőtúr is only one of the applicants.
Smaller settlements, i.e. the villages of the region, have a special position
in the LEADER. In some cases, they are subject to positive discrimination as applicants. What is especially important is that mostly only the local governments
are able to apply from these villages; there are no local actors with application
capacity.
The case of Mezőhék demonstrates very well the involvement and project
capacity of small villages. Mezőhék is the smallest village in the LAG area. Only
the local government is able to apply for development funds. There are some
smaller agricultural firms in the villages, but according to the general rules of
the LEADER, agricultural enterprises may not apply for LEADER funds. Civic society is very weak in the village; there is one association with strong connections
to the local government.
The Information tables in Mezőhék project illustrates the inclusion and capacity of the village. The main goal of the project is development of the village’s
image, thus influencing and reinforcing local identity. The project started in 2008
and finished in 2010.
The project originated from local demands, but the main idea for the pro­
ject came from the mayor. She thought that local identity needed development,
and that boosting the image of the village would contribute to the strengthening of the local identity and community. The main tools of this development are
the information tables presenting the local heritage of the villages. The project
inspired a real competition. Community building is the most popular project aim
in the LAG region; various institutions apply for such projects.
The main actor of the project was the local government, as project leader.
The mayor managed the involvement of local actors and their interests. She gathered
local entrepreneurs to create information tables, and presented local heritage items.
82
Bernadett Csurgó, Imre Kovách
She has connections with several local stakeholders, who provided information
on local heritage. The project was totally financed from LEADER funds, without
which the local government would not have been able to finance the project.
The project, like other LEADER projects, was supervised by the double supervisory system, which includes LAG and MVH. The local government completes the administrative tasks with the help of LAG personnel, and with whom
they have regular contact. LAG personnel spent a lot of time dealing with the administrative requirements of the project. The mayor emphasized that she would
not have been able to manage the project without the LAG personnel, as there is
no capacity for project management inside the local government.
The project was led by the mayor, with the assistance of LAG personnel.
The mayor and the LAG personnel made decisions together. Laymen had no real
say in the project, although the mayor aimed to collect local opinions and requests.
The project’s success is measured by the general indicators used in community-building projects. (number of stakeholders, number of information tables, etc.).
The LAG personnel evaluated the project with such general indicators and their
own framework. They used quantitative indicators. Specific local indicators did
not appear in the evaluation process.
As we mentioned before, the main purpose of the project was the development of the local image of the village. The mayor, as originator of the project,
thinks that the development of the local image and the collection and presentation of the local heritage can contribute to the development of a local identity as
the main base of the community. She used image development as a tool for community and local-capacity building.
5. Exclusion through non-local and top-down control
Most of the respondents feel that the LEADER is important in the local development process, although many of them criticise the LEADER system in Hungary.
They emphasised that this system is not a real bottom-up development system.
The LAG has no real power in decision-making. Local actors are not able to decide on development locally: all decisions are controlled by the MVH. The system
is over-bureaucratised, and not in line with bottom-up principles. Several local
actors feel that this system is more characterised by top-down principles than
bottom-up ones. Most of the respondents emphasised that the LEADER in Hungary has special Hungarian characteristics which often conflict with European
principles.
Agricultural enterprises were the most active actors in 2004–2006 in the region: 55.8% of projects were connected to agriculture. Agriculture had a central
position in future development strategies and plans. Local agrarian actors have
Networking LEADER and Local Oligarchies
83
the knowledge and capacity to participate in development projects. In addition,
local agrarian actors do not create a local community, they have only individual
projects. Agriculture was one of the main topics of the first LEADER plan.
According to the new regulations of LEADER in 2007–2013, agriculture is
excluded from LEADER funds. The rule is that firms making more than 51% in
profit from agriculture may not apply for LEADER funds. Locals have rewritten the LEADER development plan, focusing on local community-building and
the development of non-agricultural enterprises.
The LAG is situated under the MVH, which means that LAG decisions and
implementations are controlled and regulated by the MVH. It is seen as a really
bureaucratic body by local actors. It has a central position in the rural-development project system. The LAG as a local development body intermediates between local actors and the MVH as a public body. Nevertheless, the LAG has
an important position in the local-development system. The LAG, and mainly
the LAG personnel, engage with different actors in the region.
The decision-making process at the local level is divided into two phases.
The first phase is connected to the LAG personnel, who prepare all the documents
and tasks before decision-making. The second phase of local decision-making is
connected to the LAG, and especially to the Board. The Board decides locally on
all the LEADER issues (like development plans, projects, etc.). The characteristic
process used in local decision-making is discussion-based consensus. Nevertheless, the final decision is the responsibility of the MVH. We can say that the final
decision-making process is characterised by dictating methods.
The Nagykunságért LAG does not use explicit conflict-resolution mechanisms.
There are several cases when conflicts have arisen. The main causes of conflicts are
connected to the double decision-making system of the Hungarian LEADER. Local
project applicants and project leaders often feel that the LAG personnel do not have
enough knowledge and competence, and they need to connect directly to the MVH.
Because of this double system, project owners feel that the processes are too slow
and they do not understand the function of the local LAG.
The case of the Mesterszállás Villages Day project illustrates the negative
consequences of this bureaucratic and double control system. Mesterszállás is one
of the smallest settlements in the LAG region. The Village Day project aimed to
organise a one-day community event in the village, with a number of activities.
The project began in 2007, and finished in 2010 because there were several problems with the financial closure of the project. The local ‘Village Day’ community
event was organized in July of 2007 and ran two days during a weekend.
The project originated from local demands for community building. According to the Development Strategy of the LAG, small settlements in the region have
the possibility to apply to organize local events. All the small settlements apply
for such activities, and all of them successfully organized their local events. There
84
Bernadett Csurgó, Imre Kovách
was a separate fund inside the local LEADER funds for the community building of
small settlements. Therefore, it was not a real competitive process.
The project leader was the local government. Local persons, firms and local
public organizations were involved in the organization of the Village Day event.
Local actors organized different activities and supplied their services during
the event. Local government, mostly through the mayor, included local stakeholders in the organization process. Local government was the most active actor in
the project, from the application through to the closing of the project.
The project absolutely depended on LEADER funds: 95% of the project was
financed by LEADER funds, and 5% by the local government budget. The local
government aims to organize Village Days every summer, but without LEADER
funds they are not able to provide rich activities and free programs for locals.
The project was supervised by the LAG and MVH. In the case of bureaucratic tasks, this project had a double dimension. On the one hand, there was
a strong relationship between the LAG personnel and the local government which
led the project. On the other hand, there was a second relationship concerning
the bureaucratic closure of the project between the local government as project
leader, and MVH as supervisor.
While local government hardly felt bureaucratic constraints local stakeholders emphasized the difficulties in administering the project. The administrative
manager of the project complained that she spent too much time on dealing with
bureaucratic requirements.
The process of leading the project was simple. The main element of the pro­
ject was the organization of local events. The main organizer was the local
government, which involved local actors. All the decisions were made by local
government. Local actors participated in the project as service providers, their
interests and opinions integrated through the local event-organization process.
The project was measured by the general measurement of the LEADER pro­
ject. General indicators concern the number of visitors to the event, number of
activities, etc. It used mostly quantitative indicators. There was an evaluation
proc­ess, managed by LAG personnel, during which they formally evaluated
the outcomes of the project. Interviewees pointed out that this process was bureaucratic and highly formal.
The real purpose of the project was community building of local society
through local events. The LAG aims to help small settlements to organize local
community events as a tool for community building. The local government of
Mesterszállás complained that the bureaucratic tasks of the project were too difficult, and in the future, they aim to organize local events without LEADER funds
because they spend too much time and money on bureaucratic tasks, and they have
less capacity to build a local community than they want or need. The local gove­
r­nment, as project leader, was disappointed in of the framework of the LEADER
Networking LEADER and Local Oligarchies
85
because the LAG was not independent enough (not bottom-up enough), and there
were too many bureaucratic commitments.
The problems mentioned were not only the bureaucratic system of LEADER,
but also the position of LAG members in the LEADER, who were presented by
local respondents as being in a conflicting situation. Buying many business shares
also presents a difficulty for local actors, and constitutes an important form of
social exclusion. LAG members do not feel they have any advantages from their
membership, yet still have the expense of membership. Many of them want to get
out of the LAG.
Finally, the general rules of the LEADER system also cause local conflicts.
In the case of the Nagykunságért LEADER region, agricultural enterprises were
the most active actors in 2004–2006: 55.8% of projects were connected to agriculture. Agriculture has a central position in future development strategies and
plans, and local agrarian actors have the knowledge and capacity to participate in
development projects. Agriculture was one of the main topics of the first LEADER
plan. Yet now there is a new set of regulations of LEADER for 2007–2013, and
agriculture is excluded from LEADER funds. The rule is that firms making more
than 51% of their profits from agriculture may not apply for LEADER funds. This
form of social exclusion causes a number of conflicts in this region, where the importance of agriculture is stable and high.
6. Conclusions
The case of the Nagykunságért LAG illustrates how local notables dominate the process of rural development. It also demonstrates the social-exclusion
characteristic of LEADER-type development (S h u c k s m i t h 2000; S h o r t a l l 2004). Exclusion, as described in Shucksmith’s approaches, is a much
broader concept than poverty. In our perspective it is not a poverty-based concept
(S h u c k s m i t h, C h a p m a n 1998) but refers to the power of actors (C s u r g ó,
K o v á c h, K u č e r o v á 2008) and participation. Shucksmith argues that ‘the
more articulate and powerful individuals and groups were better able to engage with programmes and to apply for grants and submit proposals, while others, lacking the formers’ capacity to act, were unable to benefit’ (S h u c k s m i t h
2000: 210). Only those actors who have knowledge and extensive networks
are able to parti­cipate in the rural-development process (C s u r g ó, K o v á c h,
K u č e r o v á 2008).
The case of the Nagykunságért LAG area demonstrates the limit of the actors’
involvement in local rural development. Actors in rural development are characterised by their strong knowledge of production and reproduction capacity, and
their intensive use of different types of knowledge. Involved goals, knowledge,
86
Bernadett Csurgó, Imre Kovách
capacity to act and special skills in administrative mechanisms are the base of involvement and participation, and determine who gains and who loses in the proc­
ess (C s u r g ó, K o v á c h, K u č e r o v á 2008).
Most of the supported projects are connected to community building. Civic organizations and local government were active in community-building pro­
jects. The second most popular project aim was the development of SMEs. Most
of the applicants who implemented enterprise-development projects came from
Mezőtúr.
Project participation strongly depends on the capacity of actors in the case
of the Nagykunságért LAG. Actors with capacity are very much involved within
the project, but those without capacity they are crowded out and have no access to
resources (C s u r g ó, K o v á c h, K u č e r o v á 2008; K e l e m e n, B o l d i z s á r,
N a g y 2008; S h u c k s m i t h 2000).
This case also demonstrates that LEADER-type development is conflicting
and inconsistent in Hungary (H i g h, N e m e s 2007). The question of accountability is not central to the thinking of the LAG. The LAG is responsible for its
work and activities like any other non-profit enterprise. The LAG is also responsible for the legal and administrative work of LEADER in the region.
Most of the respondents perceive the MVH to have the strongest responsibility and control. It is responsible for the framework and rules of LEADER, so
it is responsible for the long-term outcomes of LEADER-type development in
Hungary. The MVH supervises the LEADER, and local respondents account for
its moral and legal responsibility. Most of the respondents criticise the LEADER
as being too general and bureaucratic. As we described earlier, this has resulted in
the LAG’s work and position in the LEADER system as being primarily formal,
without real power and responsibility.
The LEADER system can be seen as a new form of governance. LEADER
can give more power to local institutions (R a y 2001). The replacement of local
institutions involves a change in the way that knowledge is used for management.
Local institutions tend to use their local, mostly tacit, knowledge (B r u c k m e i e r
2004). The shift of the knowledge system is one of the major impacts of local institutions on government methods, because it is often accompanied by a change in
control over resources (C s u r g ó, K o v á c h, K u č e r o v á 2008).
References
B r u c k m e i e r K. (2004), CORASON – Framework for the Analysis of Rural Sustainable Development, http://www.corason.hu, 21.032012.
C s i t e A. (2005), Reménykeltők, Századvég, Budapest.
C s u r g ó B., K o v á c h I. (2000), LEADER in Hungary – Bottom-up development with top-down
control. Three case studies from Hungary, HAS CSS Institute for Sociology, Budapest.
Networking LEADER and Local Oligarchies
87
C s u r g ó B., K o v á c h I., K u č e r o v á E. (2008), Knowledge, Power and Sustainability in Contemporary Rural Europe, „Sociologia Ruralis”, July, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 292–312.
C s u r g ó B., K o v á c h I., L é g m á n A., M e g y e s i B. (2010), Energy demand, Governance
and Infrastructure in Hajdú Bihar County: The Hungarian Case, [in:] I. G o t t s, I. K o v á c h
(eds.), Climate Change and Local Governance: Alternative approaches to influencing household energy consumption: A comparative study of five European regions, MTA Politikatudományi Intézet, Budapest, pp. 185–224.
F a z e k a s Z., N e m e s G. (2005), Kísérleti Leader-jellegű program Magyarországon, [in:] AVOP
Leader+ készségek elsajátítása, Tananyag, Promei-Faluműhely Alapítvány-Szrva-ZRVA, pp.
457–482.
H i g h Ch., N e m e s G. (2007), Social learning in LEADER: Exogenous, endogenous and hybrid
evaluation in rural development, „Sociologia Ruralis”, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 103–119.
K e l e m e n E., B o l d i z s á r M., N a g y Kalamász I. (2008), Knowledge Dynamics and Sustainability in Rural Livelihood Strategies: Two Case Studies from Hungary, „Sociologia Ruralis”, Vol. 48, Issue 3, pp. 257–273.
K i s s K., S z e k e r e s n é Köteles R. (2010), A helyi akciócsoportok szerepe a versenyképes
és fenntartható vidékfejlesztés megvalósításában, „Tér és Társadalom”, vol. 24, szá. 3,
pp. 119–135.
K o v á c h I. (2000), LEADER, New Social Order, and the Central and East-European Countries,
„Sociologia Ruralis”, Vol. 40, Issue 2, pp. 181–189.
K o v á c h I., K u c e r o v á E. (2006), The Project Class in Central Europe: The Czech and Hungarian Cases, „Sociologia Ruralis”, No. 1, Vol. 46, s. 181‒189.
K o v á c h I., K u c e r o v á E. (2009), The Social Context of Project Proliferation – The Rise of
a Project Class, „Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning”, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 203–220.
M a u r e l M.-C. (2009), Local actors facing environmental issues: lessons for a bottom-up approach, http://hal.archivesouvertes.fr/docs/00/50/30/99/PDF/8_Maurel_2009_Local_actors_
facing_environmental_issues.pdf, 21.032012.
N e m e s G. (2005), A Magyarországi vidékfejlesztés eddigi tapasztalatai, a Leader+ intézkedés
tartalmi elemei és alkalmazásának szabályai, [in:] AVOP Leader+ készségek elsajátítása, Tananyag, Promei-Faluműhely Alapítvány-Szrva-ZRVA, pp. 331–354.
R a y C. (2001), Territorial co-operation between rural areas: elements of a political economy
of EU rural development, „Sociologa Ruralis”, Vol. 41, Issue 3, pp. 279–295.
S h o r t a l l S. (2004), Social or Economic Goals, Civic Inclusion or Exclusion? An Analysis of Rural
Development Theory and Practice, „Sociologia Ruralis”, Vol. 44, Issue 1, pp. 109–123.
S h u c k s m i t h M. (2000), Endogenous Development, Social Capital and Social Inclusion: perspectives from leader in the UK, „Sociologia Ruralis”, Vol. 40, Issue 2, pp. 208–218.
S h u c k s m i t h M., C h a p m a n Pollyanna P. (1998), Rural Development and Social Exclusion,
„Sociologia Ruralis”, Vol. 38, Issue 2, pp. 225–242.
Bernadett Csurgó, Imre Kovách
SIECI LEADER I LOKALNE OLIGARCHIE
Streszczenie. W artykule przedstawiono studium przypadku dotyczące węgierskiej lokalnej
grupy działania „Nagykunságért”, zwrócono uwagę na podmiotowe ograniczenia uczestników
LAG zaangażowanych w rozwój obszarów wiejskich na poziomie lokalnym. Udział w projekcie
88
Bernadett Csurgó, Imre Kovách
(w opisywanym regionie) uzależniony jest od możliwości finansowanych i zdolności zarządczych
poszczególnych uczestników. Osoby posiadające wymienione zdolności są włączane do projektu,
natomiast ci, którzy nimi nie dysponują zostają pozbawieni zasobów lokalnych. Główną charakterystyką uczestników procesu zrównoważonego rozwoju obszarów wiejskich jest ich zdolność
do korzystania z różnego rodzaju informacji i rozpowszechniania wiedzy. Poruszono też problem
włączenia i wykluczenia oraz władzy lokalnych oligarchów w kontekście wykorzystania podejścia
LEADER zarówno na rzecz demokracji, jak i przeciwko samorządności i redystrybucji funduszy
rozwojowych.
Słowa kluczowe: uczestnictwo społeczne, oligarchia, władza lokalna.